Classical Liberal vs Social Liberal

This video goes in depth on the difference between the classical liberal and the social liberal. We discuss how they came about, what they stood for, and how they evolved.

[thehucklebillyfenn]

From my understanding, Social Liberalism and Classical Liberalism both have similarities such as the protection of individual rights such as religious freedom, property, consent of the governed, equality, etc. It is when you reach the role of the government and economic policy when you see the shift.

Classical Liberals are more likely to favor individual action towards issues like education and poverty, so you are likely to see the endorsement of private charities and private schools. Taxes are paid to retain infrastructure such as roads, electricity, and public administrative buildings. Social issues are to be determined by the people with no interference from the government. Trade is typically free market without protectionist policies and there is little regulation in corporations.

Social liberalism, on the other hand, is more likely to believe that the government plays a hand in addressing social issues such as equality, education, and poverty, so you are much likely to see a social liberal support a welfare state with modest to moderate taxes on the wealthy to support the poor, laws prohibiting discrimination, and public education such as K-12 and potentially college. There is more likely to be protectionist policies to help pay for increased government spending, and social liberals might find themselves in support of unions and corporate regulation.

Social Liberalism is often confused with Social Democracy, but they are 2 fundamentally opposing ideologies. Social Democracy is the ideas of Marxist ideology, ie socialism, working within a capitalist framework. This involves huge social safety nets, state owned industries like coal or oil, and huge protections on workers rights at the cost of corporate rights. Social Liberalism is rooted in Liberal philosophy with small social safety nets, state regulated but rarely owned industries while balancing the natural rights of both people and the corporations. Think of Social Democrats as favoring equality of outcome whereas Social liberalism favors equality of opportunity. You could say that social liberalism is a compromise between classical liberalism and social democracy.

The modern US status quo within both political parties is social liberalism of varying degrees. Those that describe themselves as Progressives in the Democratic Party are likely considered social democrats. The party that is closest to classical liberal ideas is the libertarian party. No mainstream political figure within the US is communist or socialist. It is fear mongering and they are simply social liberals or social democrats.

I hope my explanation clears up any misconceptions. This is the American context of the terms and might be different in say Scandinavia which is the birthplace of social Democracy

[ThePastAnalysis]

Thank you for this video! Social Liberalism for the win!

[oliverleonard]

I joined the Liberal Democrats quite obviously because I do agree with the arguments from Classic Liberalism - free speech & free-market trade - because I also agree with the Social Liberal side of things - making the Conservative party totally a no-go, e.g I think some government regulation for things such as workers rights and food standards is required. However I wouldn't go as far as Labour by having everything controlled by the government hence why I fit better with the Liberal Democrats than either Labour or Conservative despite both parties being the clear major parties in the UK, I choose to vote for a 3rd party than covers something the others don't quite get right. As It doesn't bother me which one of the two major parties wins an election, in hope that if enough people think like me, they could actually win.

[darcyblackburn]

I'm curious to know your citation of these facts. Please and thank you.

[Ko-vbmq]

The primary difference between these two liberal camps is their take on economic policy. One wants less regulation of the economy, the other wants more. When it comes to civil matters, both sides tend to agree, and the same can be said of foreign policy etc.; which often marginalizes them within their respected parties. However, these two groups (who are in the minority of mainstream politics) are stuck in this endless tug-of-war when it comes to economic policy. This is, of course, because the real issues surrounding their concern with the current state of the economy lie not in legislation (or lack thereof); but rather, in the economy itself. All of the externalities produced by corporate America are byproducts of unaccountable business models. Co-ops, and other alternative business models, are market solutions to a market problems. They not only promote social and environmental justice; but they are 100% compatible with a laissez-faire economy.

[thesqueakingrat]

Sorry and I am a classical liberal I don't like social liberalism I hate wokeism

[charles_sumner]

George Washington was a social liberal if you look at the political compass. Social liberals unite!

[MaxAbramson]

Social liberalism is just classical liberalism (or libertarianism) plus modest taxes on the wealthy and/or pollution taxes to pay for a basic social safety net. Social liberals would not tax one group of people to pay able bodied people to stay at home or abuse alcohol and drugs. Consequently, the United States is the only western country without a large political party representing social liberalism, despite its popularity.